Howard Brown Health Center ( HBHC, formerly Howard Brown Memorial Clinic ) has been a very difficult Chicago LGBT agency to cover over the years. I started reporting about their work in 1984 when I first started as a writer at GayLife newspaper. The clinic had been in place since the 1970s as a health service provider, and research center, but with the start of the AIDS epidemic, it necessarily shifted its focus to this crisis.
HBHC has provided incredible and necessary services for the city of Chicago for tens of thousands of people across several decades. But the agency has gone through many staff and board upheavals, and has had more than its share of controversy, especially involving executive directors. It has always been difficult to get to the truth, about what was really behind any scandals.
This most recent crisis might be larger, but its cause is rooted in the same climate that created previous problems. As an outsider, especially someone trying to cover their problems, I would boil down the complicated issues to two simple concepts: too much secrecy and too little accountability.
For decades, HBHC has been really good at silencing the departing board members and employees ( through confidentiality contracts and severance packages ) . Whether this is to protect the agency or their own remaining jobs, the clinic has somehow managed to operate mostly behind a veil of secrecy. And when there are no problems, maybe that policy seems to work fine. But when problems happen, and they are covered up, the secrecy only makes the situation worse. Then, the lack of accountability adds even more sludge to the garbage pile.
While some people do not believe the recent crisis at HBHC was done for personal gain, it did cause actual pain. Funds may have been diverted from government projects to cover general overhead, or, worse, funds might have been diverted and misspent in other ways. And, how does one even describe "personal gain" in this situation? If, by diverting money to cover up financial gaps, some people ( or board members ) were allowed to stay in place, that is personal gain of a monetary or "status" kind. The protection of reputation is a matter of personal gain even if no money was taken.
But if the problems had been pointed out at the time, and taken to the community, the community would likely have understood and stepped up to help. Honesty is always the best policy.
When I was on the Gay Games board and we were short of funds at the end of the event, I strongly advocated going public with the amount we needed to raise, and our board did in fact speak very truthfully to the community. Several hundred people came forward to help us break even within a year of the event's closure. We were very clear to everyone about what was needed, and we negotiated with vendors and venues to end in the black. Hiding would not have made the situation go away, and in fact would have only made it worse once it became known. The Gay Games was a $10-million high-profile community project, and had it lost money on a permanent basis, it would have been an embarrassment to Chicago and hurt our vendors. Our board rightfully would have been held accountable.
The same is true of HBHC. Whenever their financial troubles started, both the board and executive staff should have been honest with their situation. And if any other LGBT group is currently facing a similar crisis, I urge them to come forward now, and be honest with our community.
As it stands, HBHC's new leaders are trying to clean up the garbage they inherited. But no one really believes things will change at HBHC unless the following changes happen:
—100-percent full disclosure of what was known and when it was known;
—Any executive, decision-making staff member from that time period is fired;
—Any board member who served on HBHC prior to Jan. 1, 2010, should be asked to leave, with a solid and fully transparent transition plan to bring in new board members.
It may be true that not all board members, or top staff, had a role in the problems of the last two or three years. But there are only two places you can stand: you either knew it was happening and did nothing ( and that includes not making it public ) , or you didn't know and therefore you were not doing your job. In the case of the board, your role is oversight of the organization. The board is just as guilty as the staff in a non-profit such as HBHC. If you are a board member who tried to make change, but you were not successful, then you can still serve our community without having to be on the board to do so. Anyone can help.
We need HBHC in our community. There are good employees who work there, and clients need the services of HBHC and Lesbian Community Care Project. But we need the culture at HBHC to change to one of transparency and accountability. Now.
